SVF
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceMeta-analysisEurope PMCOpen access

Synergistic effects of mesenchymal stem cells and their secretomes with scaffolds in burn wound healing: a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies

Aghayan AH., Mohammadi D., Atashi A., Jamalpoor Z.

Meta-analysis on Chronic Wound, Burns, Scar, Chronic Inflammation, published in J Transl Med (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Meta-analysis
Journal
J Transl Med (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
40598532
PMCID
PMC12210777
DOI
10.1186/s12967-025-06712-y
Citations
11

Abstract (original English)

Background Burn injuries cause severe physical and psychological challenges. Current treatments have limitations, such as incomplete skin regeneration and prolonged healing times, necessitating innovative solutions. Tissue engineering integrates mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and scaffolds in preclinical studies to enhance healing, reduce scarring, and regenerate skin. This study examines their combined effects to optimize burn wound therapies. Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted per PRISMA guidelines, with the protocol registered in PROSPERO. Databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest) were searched for published studies.The SYRCLE tool assessed risk of bias. Standardized mean difference (SMD) evaluated the therapeutic effect of MSC-scaffold combinations. Statistical analysis employed a random-effects model. Sensitivity analysis, publication bias assessment, and subgroup analysis addressed heterogeneity. Results Our meta-analysis reveals that animals treated with MSC-scaffold combinations exhibit enhanced wound closure compared to untreated controls across short-term (SMD = 3.97), mid-term (SMD = 3.47), and long-term (SMD = 3.03) timeframes. Additionally, MSC-scaffold combinations significantly improve angiogenesis (SMD = 6.24), collagen deposition (SMD = 4.97), and growth factor expression (SMD = 6.68), while effectively modulating i

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
Mesenchymal Stem CellsAnimalsHumansBurnsMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationWound HealingPublication BiasTissue ScaffoldsSecretome
Chronic WoundBurnsScarChronic Inflammation
View on PubMedFull text on Europe PMCDOI

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

View all: topic “synergistic effects mesenchymal”View all: author aghayanView all: year 2025

Related research